Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck. - Page 186

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-13-2004, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
What's that latin saying for reduced to absurdity?

I have a visceral reaction to people who seek to regulate others' private behaviors. Funny, isn't that what libertarians do? Argue in favor of liberty and choice? What are you again?

Not Me · 10-13-2004, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by andViolins
I may be wrong here, but I thought that the pill is, in essence, an abortion -- the fertilized egg does not implant on the wall of the uterus because the hormones from the pill make the woman's body react as if it is already pregnant.

aV

The combination pill (estrogen and progesterone) suppresses ovulation, so there is no fertilization. The mini-pill (progesterone only) may suppress ovulation, too, but it is less consistent. The mini-pill also works to thicken the cervical mucous which prevents the sperm from traveling through the fallopian tubes. So both of those forms of birth control prevent fertilization.

The morning after pills (which are just the combination pills taken in higher doses) cause a surge in estrogen followed by an abrupt withdrawal, which leads to sloughing of the endometrium. So the morning after pills prevent implantation because there is nothing for a fertilized egg to implant itself in.

Tyrone Slothrop · 10-13-2004, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski

Kerry 228 Bush 291

Larry Sabato:

We continue to believe that President Bush absolutely, positively MUST have at least a 51 percent approval rating in the nation as a whole to be reelected. Second, given our surmise that the undecideds/leaners will break somewhat more heavily for Kerry, we think Bush needs to have built a lead of at least several points overall to win narrowly. In other words, a polling tie probably results in Kerry's election.

Another reason for concern in the Bush ranks ought to be the likelihood of an enormous turnout (by American standards)--somewhere between 55 and 60 percent of eligible adults. The Crystal Ball suspects that the larger the turnout, the more likely there will be at least a slight Democratic tilt to the additional increment of participants. In our travels this election season, we've seen both anecdotal evidence and some statistical proof in the party identification of new registrants that supports our suspicion. We are tempted to argue that Bush actually needed his full 5 to 6 percent September lead to insure a narrow victory.

More (bold in original).

Not Me · 10-13-2004, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I have a visceral reaction to people who seek to regulate others' private behaviors. Funny, isn't that what libertarians do? Argue in favor of liberty and choice? What are you again?

Is it a private behavior when someone kills their 3 year old in the privacy of their own home?

sebastian_dangerfield · 10-13-2004, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by andViolins
I may be wrong here, but I thought that the pill is, in essence, an abortion -- the fertilized egg does not implant on the wall of the uterus because the hormones from the pill make the woman's body react as if it is already pregnant.

aV

Hey, Hello, where do you stand on the pill? How about the morning after pill? Since we're outing absurd positions, I figure why not open the floodgates and let all the idiocy out.

bilmore · 10-13-2004, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you phrase the dilemma this way, it suggests to me that poor people have the right to health care, at least when their life is threatened. Is this your view?

Yes.

bilmore · 10-13-2004, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
How profound coming from one who'll never have to deal with the "tough shit" he cavalierly suggests others - whom he doesn't even fucking know - must endure to satisfy his moral views. Where in the fuck do you get off telling anyone what he or she can't do with his/her body? You don't even know these fucking people. Mind your own business. If you don't like abortion, don't have one, but keep your fucking hands out of your neighbors' business. Its just that simple.

And don't come back with some horseshit about how "if i don't stand up against murder, I'll be remiss" or cite how "the Germans never complained when the Nazis first came for the Jews and look what happened!" horseshit reply. If my 16 year old daughter gets knocked up, you have no goddamn right to tell her what she'll be doing for the rest of her life. That's her decision and hers alone.

I mean, really, where do you get the fucking gall? And don't say I don't "get" your position. I understand that you see it as murder, but I say you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. And you are unqualified to speak. In a free country, you err on the side of freedom, and freedom is choice. You're not fucking with morals here - you're fucking with people's liberty. We don't all have to adhere to "Bilmore's morals" - those are for his house, and his family. I wouldn't dare tell you how to live... where do you get off?

Right here.

bilmore · 10-13-2004, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
I think what she's saying is that it is de facto the woman's burden exclusively if the man is not there to share it. I didn't get anywhere from her post that the raising of a child is biologically the woman's burden.

That's how I understood it too. I just didn't see the point - if mom flies away, dad's left to raise the kid. A rarer thing, obviously, but I just thought the idea didn't flow right.

Not Me · 10-13-2004, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If you phrase the dilemma this way, it suggests to me that poor people have the right to health care, at least when their life is threatened. Is this your view?

There is a law that mandates this. ERs aren't allowed to turn people away because they can't pay.

I think the government should compensate the hospitals for this free care they force the hospitals to give.

bilmore · 10-13-2004, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Larry Sabato:

The whole article is spot-on. Sabato nails it with this one.

dtb · 10-13-2004, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
That's how I understood it too. I just didn't see the point - if mom flies away, dad's left to raise the kid. A rarer thing, obviously, but I just thought the idea didn't flow right.

Uh, actually, that's not the case. If the mom "flies away" -- she gets prosecuted for abandonment. Not so the father.

bilmore · 10-13-2004, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dtb
Uh, actually, that's not the case. If the mom "flies away" -- she gets prosecuted for abandonment. Not so the father.

Seriously? I mean, is this the law? Is it abandonment if the kid is left with the father? Or, do you mean, the dad can disappear, but then the mom is stuck, and would then be guilty of abandonment if she left the kid? (Because I know for a fact that a dad that tries that gets charged.)

dtb · 10-13-2004, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Seriously? I mean, is this the law? Is it abandonment if the kid is left with the father? Or, do you mean, the dad can disappear, but then the mom is stuck, and would then be guilty of abandonment if she left the kid? (Because I know for a fact that a dad that tries that gets charged.)

I'm talking about the "pregnant teen who delivers a baby and then leaves it in the bathroom during the prom" scenario. Does anything happen to the father of that baby?

Tyrone Slothrop · 10-13-2004, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Not Me
I think the government should compensate the hospitals for this free care they force the hospitals to give.

The crazy, crazy thing about the economics of the health-care industry is all of the cross-subsidization. Everything and everyone is subsidized by someone else, and they're all working the system to improve their position. It's enough to drive anyone insane.

Diane_Keaton · 10-13-2004, 01:22 PM

Iraq: Graves of dead children found. What a great idea -- another 15 years of sanctions which were "working" because they allowed for "containment". Containment of the Iraqi population (especially Kurds) that is. I'm sure going to miss reading about thousands of dying children each month. Yeah, it's sad and all, but at least I felt safe because danger to me was "contained" and no US soldiers were getting killed. Ah, Sanctions. The Good Old Days.